Authors

  • Srinivasan Narayanan
    Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37547/tajet/Volume07Issue05-05

Keywords:

Global Order Promising Oracle ATP Oracle EBS Order Scheduling Shipping

Abstract

This article deals with the intricacies of packaging lead time requirements in order fulfillment in the Business-to-Business (B2B) context, with different requirements being customer-driven and regulation-driven. The article discusses how Oracle E-Business Suite (EBS) as an integrated ERP package handles order promising processes and how it addresses packaging requirements on domestic and international shipments. In the B2B context, customers need materials shipped in particular types of packaging, from generic cartons to specialized packing skids or pallets. As a robust application, Oracle EBS is strongly positioned to address such packaging needs in a diversified manner by sub-applications like Oracle Order Management and Oracle Global Order Promising. The document talks about the setup of packaging specifications in Oracle EBS using common lookups, descriptive flexfields (DFF), and workflows within Oracle Order Management. Order line workflow customization and defaulting rules are also dealt with in the document to further optimize the order promising process, presenting an end-to-end solution to simplify operations. Finally, the paper outlines Oracle EBS benefits in order fulfillment automation, compliance assurance, and customer satisfaction improvement. It highlights the important part that technology plays in coping with the intricacies of contemporary manufacturing and supply chain management and presents Oracle EBS as a central facilitator of operational excellence and long-term business expansion. As a whole, this journal presents a complete image of the dynamics of packaging lead time demands in the B2B model and the important role played by Oracle EBS in mitigating these challenges.


background image

The American Journal of Engineering and Technology

64

https://www.theamericanjournals.com/index.php/tajet

TYPE

Original Research

PAGE NO.

64-75

DOI

10.37547/tajet/Volume07Issue05-05



OPEN ACCESS

SUBMITED

18 March 2025

ACCEPTED

24 April 2025

PUBLISHED

09 May 2025

VOLUME

Vol.07 Issue 05 2025

CITATION

Srinivasan Narayanan. (2025). Enhancing Order Scheduling Efficiency with
Packaging Lead Time in Oracle E-Business Suites Implementation. The
American Journal of Engineering and Technology, 7(05), 64

75.

https://doi.org/10.37547/tajet/Volume07Issue05-05

COPYRIGHT

© 2025 Original content from this work may be used under the terms
of the creative commons attributes 4.0 License.

Enhancing Order
Scheduling Efficiency with
Packaging Lead Time in
Oracle E-Business Suites
Implementation


Srinivasan Narayanan

Milwaukee, Wisconsin, USA

Abstract:

This article deals with the intricacies of

packaging lead time requirements in order fulfillment
in the Business-to-Business (B2B) context, with
different requirements being customer-driven and
regulation-driven. The article discusses how Oracle E-
Business Suite (EBS) as an integrated ERP package
handles order promising processes and how it
addresses packaging requirements on domestic and
international shipments. In the B2B context, customers
need materials shipped in particular types of packaging,
from generic cartons to specialized packing skids or
pallets. As a robust application, Oracle EBS is strongly
positioned to address such packaging needs in a
diversified manner by sub-applications like Oracle
Order Management and Oracle Global Order Promising.
The document talks about the setup of packaging
specifications in Oracle EBS using common lookups,
descriptive flexfields (DFF), and workflows within
Oracle Order Management. Order line workflow
customization and defaulting rules are also dealt with
in the document to further optimize the order
promising process, presenting an end-to-end solution
to simplify operations. Finally, the paper outlines
Oracle EBS benefits in order fulfillment automation,
compliance assurance, and customer satisfaction
improvement. It highlights the important part that
technology plays in coping with the intricacies of
contemporary manufacturing and supply chain
management and presents Oracle EBS as a central
facilitator of operational excellence and long-term
business expansion. As a whole, this journal presents a
complete image of the dynamics of packaging lead time
demands in the B2B model and the important role
played by Oracle EBS in mitigating these challenges.


background image

65

Keywords:

Global Order Promising, Oracle ATP,

Oracle EBS, Order Scheduling, Shipping.

1. Introduction:

Order Scheduling is a critical

communications tool that helps balance customer

demands with Organization’s ability to fulfill that

demand [4]. Order scheduling is managed differently
from company to company. Some may place demand
for a product at order entry and reserve it upon release.
Others places demand a product and promise it to
customers at order entry. Still other companies may
place demand and promise a product at order entry
but, because they have high inventory levels, do not
need to reserve the product at release. Oracle Order
Entry/Shipping accommodates a range of these
scheduling practices. In each scenario, Order Promising
calculates and populates the Schedule Ship Date on the
sales order line

this is the date on which the order is

expected to be picked for shipping, if finished goods are
available [1], [2]. On this date, the finished goods
should be physically shipped out. However, in practice,
physical shipment takes some lead time after pick
releasing of order line to package and label goods,

arrange for transportation, or perform quality checks
before shipment. This period is known as

Packaging

Lead Time

, which can range from one to several days

depending on the customer, product type, or
regulatory compliance.

Currently, the Oracle EBS system does not account for
Packaging Lead Time during the scheduling process. As
a result, the system may calculate inaccurate Promised
Dates, Schedule Ship Dates, and Delivery Dates, leading
to missed commitments and negatively impacting on-
time delivery metrics and customer satisfaction.

The objective of this paper is to outline a custom
solution that incorporates Packaging Lead Time
alongside part and assembly lead times into the order
fulfillment process for both domestic and international
shipments. By doing so, organizations can provide more
accurate and realistic order promises, meet delivery
commitments,

and

improve overall

customer

satisfaction.

2. Solution Approach

Figure 1:

Packaging Process in Manufacturing

Figure 1 illustrates the schematic representation of the
packaging process in the manufacturing industry. The
packaging requirements of finished products for
international shipping are more complex compared to
domestic shipping due to the added complexities of
longer travel time, varied environmental conditions,
and compliance with international regulations. In
international shipping, packaging must provide more
protection to save products from moisture,
temperature, and physical shocks during the lengthy
travel covering multiple regions. Furthermore,
international shipments necessitate more extensive

documentation and marking, such as country-of-origin
marking, adherence to customs regulations. These
activities take two or more days depending on the
packaging requirements.

Conversely, domestic deliveries have shorter delivery
durations and fewer regulatory concerns. Though
protection remains a high priority, the packaging needs
are less extreme. Domestic shipping is more a matter of
getting products to their destination safely with
handling instructions but without the complication of
cross-border regulations. So, lead time for domestic


background image

66

shipment packaging is less than international.in both
the cases we need to have an option to capture this
lead time as part of order fulfillment process.

To accomplish this, we will offset the Customer Request
Date (CRD) by the Pack Lead Time and pass the offset
CRD to ATP prior to scheduling through an ATP hook.
This does not change the initial CRD on the sales order
line, and data integrity is preserved. Therefore, ATP will
return a Scheduled Ship Date (SSD) for the modified
CRD, which will be earlier than the original customer-
requested date. Although the SSD is before the CRD on
the sales order line, the order will ship to meet the CRD.
Finally, we will balance out the Promise Date by
including the Pack LT in the SSD so that ensuring the
customer receives a realistic delivery date accounting
for the packing lead time and preparation of shipping
documents.

Oracle E- Business Suites (EBS) stands as a prominent
ERP application for managing such a business
operation. This paper describes the process mapping
within Oracle EBS addressing two facets of this
requirements:( a) Offset the Customer Requested Date
with packaging Lead Time to get earlier Scheduled Ship
Date possible, and (b) Offset the Promise Date by
adding packaging Lead Time to Scheduled Ship date so
that sales order can be shipped on time as promised to
customer.

3. Configuration

:

Configuration consists of the following components:

1. Capturing Packing Lead Time of The Products using
Lookup

2. Sales Order Line DFF to store the days offset value

3. Site Level Profile Option to govern the use of Pack
Lead Time

4. Oracle Available to Promise (ATP) API Customization
to invoke Scheduling with Modified Request Date

5. Create Defaulting Rules to populate ‘Promise Date’

(OU Specific Change)

3.1 Capturing Packing Lead Time of the Products

By leveraging Oracle Order Management, Oracle
Inventory applications, and Oracle Global Order
Promising businesses can effectively map and
implement the packing requirement, ensuring timely
delivery of products to customer. Packaging days are
mapped to sales Order line type. It is the combination
of country of destination and product categories.

To store packaging days for different sales order line
types, you can utilize the "Order management
Lookups". It allows for the capture of specific settings
for each sales order line types.


background image

67

Figure 2:

Order management Lookup to store packaging days for Line Types

The Order Management lookup setup is illustrated in
Figure 2, with a breakdown of the required fields
provided below.

Header Level:

Type: Name of the lookup in upper case which will be
added to the code

Meaning: Explanation of the lookup name

Application: denotes the application the lookup owned
by

Line Level:

Meaning: Capture the Sales Order Line Type

Description: Attibute1 (Specifies the Attribute in the
sales order line table to store packaging days)

Tag: Indicates the number of days Required for
Packaging

Effective dates: Enter from date. Line can be end dated
when it is no longer in use

Enabled: indicates whether line is Active (Checked or
Unchecked)

3.2 Sales Order Line DFF to store the days offset value

Figure 3:

Sales

Order line DFF ‘Order Lead Time Offset’ to store packaging days

As shown in Figure 3, Lead Time Offset Days can be
calculated and populated in the Sales Order Line DFF [1]
via a custom concurrent job, an extension, or manual
entry, as described below. The business can choose one
or more of these options, depending on factors such as
sales order volume, order entry mode, and the type of
order scheduling method used.

a) Develop Custom Program (Job) to populate SO Line
DFF With Default offset days.

This program is designed to be scheduled in the same

manner as the ‘Schedule Order’ program and must be

set up separately for each Operating Unit (OU). It

identifies all Sales Orders within the specified OU that
have an unpopulated Order Lead Time DFF. For each of
these orders, it examines the Order Line Type and
checks for a corresponding entry in the Pack Lead Time
Offset lookup table. If a match is found, the program
retrieves the associated number of days from the
lookup and updates the Order Lead Time DFF on the
Sales Order Line accordingly. This program should be
scheduled from the OM Responsibilities and must run

prior to each execution of the ‘Schedule Order’

program.

b) Modify the Sales Order Line Workflow and add node
in to calculate and populate the offset day. The node to


background image

68

calculate and populate the DFF will be placed before scheduling event on the workflow.

Figure 4:

Sales

Order ‘Line Flow –

Generic’ Workflow [1]

As shown in Figure 4, sales Order line Flow

Generic

workflow can be customized to get offset days and
populate in sales Order Line DFF.

c) Modify the Order Import Code to calculate and
populate DFF when the Sales Order is imported from an
external system. When a sales Order is imported from
External system, you can create your own version of
Order Import program and include a logic to calculate
and populate Lead time Offset value in sales order DFF.

d) Train the Order Entry personal to populate/override
the DFF with desired days manually. When the sales
order is manually entered. Order entry person can
enter, or override system defaulted offset values in the
sales order line DFF.

3.3 Site Level Profile Option to govern the use of
Packaging Lead Time

When

introducing

a

customization,

Oracle

recommends using a profile option to govern the
functionality, so that it can be easily turned off in case

of an issue. In line with Oracle’s recommendation, the

Packaging Lead Time functionality can be controlled
using a profile option [3].

Profile Option Name: XXOM_Use_Pack_LT_Offset

Possible Values: Yes / No

This profile controls the use of the Packaging Lead Time
offset functionality at the instance level. If the profile is
NULL or set to No, the offset functionality is disabled,
and ATP operates as designed by Oracle. If the profile is

set to ‘Yes,’ the syst

em will attempt to offset the

Customer Request Date and schedule the order using
the offset days for Packaging lead time.This profile is set
at the site level and cannot be modified for individual
divisions or manufacturing organizations.

3.4 Oracle Available to Promise (ATP) Application
Programming Interface (API ) Customization to invoke
Scheduling with Modified Request Date

Oracle Available to Promise (ATP), is a subset of Global
Order Promising in Oracle EBS, performs order
promising based on the output of the Oracle Advanced

Supply Planning (ASCP) ‘Schedule Ship Date is

calculated based on Supplies, Demands, Lead Time and
other constraints. The order entry and planning
systems can either be on the same server (Centralized)
or on two separate servers (Decentralized). This
solution is compatible with both configurations.


background image

69

Figure 5:

Sales

Order Scheduling with customized ATP processing

The Sales Order Line DFF should be populated with the
offset days value, and this logic must be applied before
the Sales Order Line flow reaches the Scheduling Node
during the processing stage.

In the Scheduling stage, the ATP API is triggered. As
shown in Figure 5, a custom hook should be introduced
during the internal processing of the API to adjust the
Customer Request Date (CRD) before the ATP engine is
triggered. The modified CRD will be passed to the ATP
Engine, allowing for better material and resource
availability checks, which in turn results in an improved
or earlier Scheduled Ship Date.

Logic:

1.

The first API called during ATP processing will
be

MRP_ATP_PUB

from Order Management.

2.

When a Scheduling Action is performed, it
triggers

MRP_ATP_PUB

, which in turn initiates

the

Call_ATP

function.

3.

A custom logic should be added within the Call
to

MRP_ATP_PUB

to modify the Customer

Request Date (CRD).

Steps to Modify CRD:

Calculate the modified CRD by applying the
offset days:
p_atp_rec.Customer_request_date

=

p_atp_rec.Customer_request_date

packaging Offset Days.

Pass the modified CRD to ATP to obtain the
Scheduled Ship Date.

4.

Reinvoke the ATP API, which will now return
the Scheduled Ship Date based on the modified
Customer Request Date. The remaining
processing steps will proceed as usual. Figure 6
offers a detailed visualization of the overall
data flow.


background image

70

Figure 6:

Sales

Order Scheduling with customized ATP processing data flow in detail

3.5

Create Defaulting Rules to populate ‘Promise Date’

(OU Specific Change)

The last step in this solution is to provide realistic Order
promising date which includes packaging lead time to
customer. This can be achieved through defaulting rule
configurations in Oracle EBS. Defaulting rules will be
created to automatically populat

e the “Promise Date”

in the sales order line, improving the accuracy and
efficiency of order processing. This rule is setup and
controlled at Operating Unit (OU) level.

Operating Units intending to use the packaging lead
time solution must update their OM System
Parameters Promise Date Setup [1] to 'Manual,' as
illustrated in Figure 7.


background image

71

Figure 7:

Om System Parameters for Promise Date

As requirement is to default the Promise date with
Packaging Offset Days + Schedule Ship Date (SSD),
While scheduling line, defaulting needs to be called for
Promise date. For that Promise date must be
dependent on one/any of the scheduling attributes. But
unfortunately Promise date is not dependent on any
scheduling attribute. So, we create dependency in
oe_dependencies_extn package.

write

custom

pl/sql

package

for

API

xx_OM_Def_Promise_Date to add offset days in DFF to
SSD and populate Promise Date. This custom package
will be referenced in the Order management Defaulting
Setup [1] under Entity Attributes for Promise Date,
using a Default Source rule type defined as a PL/SQL
API, as shown in Figure 8.

Figure 8:

Promise Date Entity attribute setup with custom pl/sql package


background image

72

4. RESULTS

In this section, we will examine the impact of the order
fulfillment process with and without packaging lead
time on both Make-to-Stock and Make-to-Order
businesses.

4.1. Make To Stock (MTS):

Assumptions:

Current date: December 1, 2024

Packaging lead time offset: 2 days

The ordered item is available in inventory

Profile Option XXOM_Use_Pack_LT_Offset is

Turned On

Scenario

Customer

Request

Date (CRD)

Modified

Customer Request

Date (MCRD)

Schedule

Ship

Date(SSD)

Promise
Date(PD

)

Actual

Shipmen

t Date

CRD in the Past /Current

date*

29-Nov-24

27-Nov-24

1-Dec-24

3-Dec-24

3-Dec-24

CRD in future

10-Dec-24

8-Dec-24

8-Dec-24

10-Dec-

24

10-Dec-

24

Profile Option XXOM_Use_Pack_LT_Offset is

Turned Off

Scenario

Customer

Request

Date (CRD)

Modified Customer

Request Date

(MCRD)

Schedule

Ship

Date(SSD)

Promise

Date(PD)

Actual

Shipment

Date

CRD in the Past /Current

date*

29-Nov-24

NA

9-Dec-24

9-Dec-24

11-Dec-

24

CRD in future

10-Dec-24

NA

15-Jan-25

15-Jan-

25

17-Jan-25

* ATP cannot commit to dates in the past; it can only promise dates on or after the current date, based

on the existing supply and demand picture.

4.2 Make To Order ( MTS) :

Assumptions:

Current date: December 1, 2024

Packaging lead time offset: 2 days

The ordered item is not available in inventory

Profile Option XXOM_Use_Pack_LT_Offset is

Turned On

Scenario

Customer

Request

Date (CRD)

Modified Customer

Request Date

(MCRD)

Schedule

Ship

Date(SSD)

Promise

Date(PD)

Actual

Shipment

Date


background image

73

CRD in the Past /Current

date*

29-Nov-24

27-Nov-24

9-Dec-24

11-Dec-

24

11-Dec-

24

CRD in future

12-Dec-24

10-Dec-24

13-Jan-25

15-Jan-

25

15-Jan-25

Profile Option XXOM_Use_Pack_LT_Offset is

Turned Off

Scenario

Customer

Request

Date (CRD)

Modified Customer

Request Date

(MCRD)

Schedule

Ship

Date(SSD)

Promise

Date(PD)

Actual

Shipment

Date

CRD in the Past /Current

date*

29-Nov-24

NA

9-Dec-24

9-Dec-24

11-Dec-

24

CRD in future

10-Dec-24

NA

15-Jan-25

15-Jan-

25

17-Jan-25

* ATP cannot commit to dates in the past; it can only promise dates on or after the current date, based

on the existing supply and demand picture.

4.3 Inferences

For both Make-to-Order (MTO) and Make-to-Stock
(MTS) business models:

As shown, the Scheduled Ship Date improves because
the adjusted Customer Request Date is passed to ATP.
The Promise Date is then determined by adding the
packaging lead time to the Scheduled Ship Date.

Sales orders are shipped after the promised date
thereby missing on-time delivery metrics, when
packaging lead time is not considered in order
promising and shipping calculations.

Sales orders are shipped as promised to the customer
when packaging lead time is factored into order
promising and shipping calculations.

The results clearly demonstrate that including
packaging lead time in the order fulfillment process
enhances transparency in order promising and
supports achieving delivery metrics across different
manufacturing models.

5.

Benefits of Using This ATP Enhancement:

Transit lead time, defined in the Shipping Network,
is incorporated into initial scheduling for Transfer
Orders and Intercompany transactions.

The Scheduled Ship Date is calculated based on
Available to Promise (ATP) results.

The Customer Request Date on the Sales Order Line
remains unchanged.

ASCP is driven by the Scheduled Ship Date.

The solution supports deployment across
organizations using profile or organizational
parameter controls.

The ATP logic is triggered each time ATP is invoked
from the Order Management module.

6.

CONCLUSION

In Summary, the evolving business scenario today
brings to the foreground the necessity of providing
accurate order promising dates, especially in the
Business-to-Business (B2B) scenario, where products
are transported worldwide. Oracle E-Business Suite
(EBS) is an important ERP solution that manages the


background image

74

whole order fulfillment cycle in an efficient manner by
considering packaging lead time and supply chain
constraints. Since packaging is the final process in
manufacturing, it can be quite a number of days
depending on customer need and regulatory
compliance. Oracle EBS is perfectly integrated with
other sub-applications such as Oracle Order
Management (OM), Oracle Advanced Supply Planning
(ASCP), and Oracle Application Developer for
automated processes to avoid bottlenecks. Oracle OM,
particularly, serves as the base platform for simulation-
driven order promising so as to support certain
demands

through

heightened

precision

and

effectiveness. The benefits of this combined solution
are significant. With Oracle EBS as the platform,
companies can manage the intricacies of contemporary
manufacturing, providing operational efficiency,
compliance, and customer satisfaction throughout the
fulfillment process. This method is particularly valuable
in industries such as Engineer-to-Order, Make -to-
Order and precision machinery manufacturing, where
global shipping is a key consideration. Lastly, Oracle EBS
allows businesses to provide realistic promise dates
based on evolving packaging requirements, optimize
resource utilization, and innovate in supply chain
management and manufacturing. As technology
continues to evolve, Oracle EBS is always a reliable
partner, guiding companies towards operational
excellence.

REFERENCES

1.

Oracle

Order

Management

Application

Implementation

Manual

https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26401_01/doc.122/e
48842.pdf

2.

Global Order Promising Implementation and User's
Guidehttps://docs.oracle.com/cd/V39571_01/curr
ent/acrobat/122gopug.pdf

3.

Oracle

Applications

Developer’s

Guide

https://docs.oracle.com/cd/A85964_03/acrobat/1
15devg.pdf

4.

Seitz, A., & Grunow, M. (2016). Increasing accuracy
and robustness of order promises.

International

Journal of Production Research

,

55

(3), 656

670.

https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2016.1195024

5.

Kilger, C., Meyr, H. (2008). Demand Fulfilment and
ATP. In: Stadtler, H., Kilger, C. (eds) Supply Chain
Management and Advanced Planning. Springer,
Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-
540-74512-9_10

6.

CHEN, C., ZHAO, Z., & BALL, M. O. (2002). A MODEL

FOR BATCH ADVANCED AVAILABLE‐TO‐PROMISE.

Production and Operations Management, 11(4),
424-440.

https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-

5956.2002.tb00470.x (Original work published
2002)

7.

Natti, M. (2023). Migrating from Oracle to
PostgreSQL: Leveraging Open-Source to Reduce
Database Costs and Enhance Flexibility. The
Eastasouth Journal of Information System and
Computer

Science,

1(02),

109

112.

https://doi.org/10.58812/esiscs.v1i02.43

8.

Natti, M. (2023). Reducing Oracle RAC Wait Events
by Using Instance-Specific Block Allocation for
Production Applications. The Eastasouth Journal of
Information System and Computer Science, 1(01),
65

68. https://doi.org/10.58812/esiscs.v1i01.447

AUTHOR PROFILE

Srinivasan Narayanan earned his engineering degree from PSG College of Technology, Tamil Nadu, India, in 2001.
With over 22 years of extensive experience in IT, he has worked with several Fortune 500 companies across the US,
Europe, Japan, and Asia. His expertise spans Supply Chain Management, Material Planning, Manufacturing, Costing,
and Maintenance, with a strong focus on various Oracle applications. He is currently working as the Oracle Solution
Delivery Lead at Milwaukee Tool in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, United States.

References

Oracle Order Management Application Implementation Manual https://docs.oracle.com/cd/E26401_01/doc.122/e48842.pdf

Global Order Promising Implementation and User's Guidehttps://docs.oracle.com/cd/V39571_01/current/acrobat/122gopug.pdf

Oracle Applications Developer’s Guide https://docs.oracle.com/cd/A85964_03/acrobat/115devg.pdf

Seitz, A., & Grunow, M. (2016). Increasing accuracy and robustness of order promises. International Journal of Production Research, 55(3), 656–670. https://doi.org/10.1080/00207543.2016.1195024

Kilger, C., Meyr, H. (2008). Demand Fulfilment and ATP. In: Stadtler, H., Kilger, C. (eds) Supply Chain Management and Advanced Planning. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-540-74512-9_10

CHEN, C., ZHAO, Z., & BALL, M. O. (2002). A MODEL FOR BATCH ADVANCED AVAILABLE‐TO‐PROMISE. Production and Operations Management, 11(4), 424-440. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1937-5956.2002.tb00470.x (Original work published 2002)

Natti, M. (2023). Migrating from Oracle to PostgreSQL: Leveraging Open-Source to Reduce Database Costs and Enhance Flexibility. The Eastasouth Journal of Information System and Computer Science, 1(02), 109–112. https://doi.org/10.58812/esiscs.v1i02.43

Natti, M. (2023). Reducing Oracle RAC Wait Events by Using Instance-Specific Block Allocation for Production Applications. The Eastasouth Journal of Information System and Computer Science, 1(01), 65–68. https://doi.org/10.58812/esiscs.v1i01.447